Sennheiser HD215 upgrade?

[hifi_fan1]

Evening all

I currently have Sennheiser HD215 headphones and I use them for a lot of mp3 music (please dont hit me). I am on the move quite a bit and am looking for some less bulky cans. Has anybody got any suggestions for a budget of £200, or even £300 if significantly better for an mp3 user.

Thanks

 

[dalethorn]

Beyerdynamic DTX501p (best value by far).

Thinksound ON1 (best all-around).

ATH ESW9a (great sound but fragile cord).

B&O H6 (good all-around).

B&W P7 (more exciting, but less comfort).

Harman Soho (very small but great sound).

Momentum On-Ear (slightly uneven sound).

 

[JoelSim]

I'm not sure you will really see the benefit of spending so much if just for MP3. Something like the Musical Fidelity MF-100 will work brilliantly at half the price you mention. They are also good enough to give you excellent sound on less lossy formats too.

 

[dalethorn]

I'm not sure you will really see the benefit of spending so much if just for MP3. Something like the Musical Fidelity MF-100 will work brilliantly at half the price you mention. They are also good enough to give you excellent sound on less lossy formats too.

Good advice.

 

[JoelSim]

I'm not sure you will really see the benefit of spending so much if just for MP3. Something like the Musical Fidelity MF-100 will work brilliantly at half the price you mention. They are also good enough to give you excellent sound on less lossy formats too.

Good advice.

IMO the difference between a great headphone and a decent headphone at the same price is 10%. You generally get what you pay for, and you can choose something that suits what you listen to for more effect.

The difference between MP3 and lossless is more than that. So, what I'm saying is that if you just listen to MP3 then don't spend the extra money as you will never make the most of your purchase. It's like buying a cheap lump of cheddar cheese and some really good bread. It'll still taste like a lump of plastic but better round the edges. Buy a Montgomery cheddar and then you are talking.

 

[hifi_fan1]

Thanks for the relies so far.

I did listen to my mp3s through a pair of Denon AH-D2000 and they sounded so much better than my Sens. Though they are a bit big. I also do a bit of home listening too so the headphones would not be totally wasted.

How do the MF-100 compare to the Grado SR-225i or 325i?

 

[JoelSim]

I haven't done a side-by-side on those but they are all good headphones from good brands.

 

[fr0g]

There is nothing wrong with MP3. Indistinguishable from CD if you do the right rip. I wish people would stop saying "just mp3"...It's patently stupid.

 

[fr0g]

The difference between MP3 and lossless is more than that.

No, it actually isn't.

Go do a real ABX between a well-ripped MP3 and the flac and you will not tell the difference.

I used MP3s demoing a very expensive 800D / Classe / Lyngdorf setup, and I can tell you they were indistinguishable from the originals.

MP3, AAC, OGG, all lossy, are all absolutely fantastic codecs that do not remove anything audible if you rip at high quality.

 

[JoelSim]

The key is in the phrase 'if you rip at high quality'. Standard 128kbps bitrate MP3 is hugely worse than CD.

 

[dalethorn]

The key is in the phrase 'if you rip at high quality'. Standard 128kbps bitrate MP3 is hugely worse than CD.

I suppose there's a reason these things come up, but I'm not going to guess why. Suffice it to say that the mantra of "you can't hear blah blah blah" just isn't true. 320k CBR MP3's converted from perfect CD WAV rips don't sound as good. Now you can set up a demonstration with 15 people in a room and give each one the best headphones and have at it, and you won't come to a conclusion for several reasons: 1) The background noise level won't be as quiet as at home late at night (or in a soundproofed home). 2) The noise inside of most of the people from the energy being generated to pay attention and participate is very significant. 3) Subliminals (very significant in hi-fi) just don't register in active attention tests. 4) Untrained listeners miss things that others recognize.

Those are just a few examples. 320k CBR MP3's have a lot of information removed**, and I know people who can hear the differences easily. It helps to have a good revealing system to hear those differences, but to say that nobody can hear them because the tests are fatally flawed from the start isn't a good argument.

**The compression is approx. 4.4 to 1, or a 77 percent loss.

 

[aob9]

I would have been in the "320kbps is perfectly fine" camp until I started listening to flac 24/96. I have downloaded HD versions of Pearl Jam's "Ten" and "Vs" albums ( both originally purchased on CD in early 90's) and the difference is huge. In fact in the beginning I almost felt there was too much going on as I was listening. MP3 has dumbed down our expectations from music. I will never pay for MP3 downloads again.